Incel: “Women should not be allowed out without a man”

On Incels.me, a hangout for some of the internet’s most hopeless involuntary celibates, one young fellow has come up with a simple yet ingenious answer to the Woman Question — that question being “why do these women keep having sex with guys other than the angry woman-hating weirdos who populate sites like Incels.me?”

His answer: because they are allowed freedom of movement. His solution?

Amazingly, one of the commenters actually has an issue with this plan, wondering if keeping women locked up and/or chaperoned 24 hours a day might actually make it harder for incels to have sex with them. But JackAutismo has an answer all ready, and it sounds a bit like that “enforced monogamy” we’ve been hearing so much about.

Say what you will about the tenets of inceldom; at least it’s an ethos.

Comments

That incels believe their own rot— that is, that these are modest proposals in defence of civic order against the base and chaotic urges of women; that the worldview they profess is nothing more than the good, old-fashioned, benign patriarchy that existed in The Good Old Days before the wicked Marxist/ Post-Modernist/ Feminist Conspiracy™ made it a bad word; and they are just misunderstood nice (sic) guys thwarted in their natural rights to be lovers, fathers, bread-winners, etc., etc. — is frightening. Just thinking of the kind of fathers these self-centred, sniveling, emotional vampires would make makes my blood run cold…

I do know one in real life, and it’s worrying that he has young daughters. I’ve seen his rants on facebook, and even tho he is a friend of a friend his posts are pretty worrying. He basically believes in a libertarian future, and he sees himself as the defender and protector of his family. He sees this as his divine responsibility. He knows that myself and another friend is trans, and he likes to call us nonces and paedos, as he is pretty obsesses with child molesters, especially LGBT and Muslims who feature highly in his fantasies. He talks about making things illegal, such as sex dolls and trans people, but I have tried to reason with him on this, as he does not agree with paying tax as a sovereign citizen, there will be no police, judiciary or government to enforce these ‘laws” so in fact there won’t be any laws. He basically believes in pitchforks at dawn and mob rule. He says he believes in freedom for his children, but believes that us socialists are trying to steal his children’s inheritance. I argue, that as he has daughters not sons, his children won’t have an inheritance in the world he imagines. He says that as I don’t have kids, I have no stake in the future, but that’s a bit rich coming from a man who believes in aggressive unregulated capitalism, and denies climate change :/

Damn 2018. Imagine you’d been away from the news for a few days, maybe hiking the Appalachian trail or something, and you come back and everyone is talking about Bigfoot erotica like that’s just a normal part of the political landscape now.

I’ve said it before: we’re living in a simulation, and we’re at the point where the person controlling it is all “I’m bored with this now, let’s just whack the ‘weird shit’ slider way the fuck up and see what happens”.

Damn 2018. Imagine you’d been away from the news for a few days, maybe hiking the Appalachian trail or something, and you come back and everyone is talking about Bigfoot erotica like that’s just a normal part of the political landscape now.

It was pointed out on Wonkette: why did this guy put his own name to this stuff? I mean, there’s a reason that I go under this pseudonym and the reason isn’t all that far off from Bigfoot erotica.

Who knows, maybe there’s a future for furries in politics after all. As long as they aren’t those damned alt-right furries… *shakes fist*

Incidentally, I’m a much better artist than whoever he hired to do the cover.

Who knows, maybe there’s a future for furries in politics after all. As long as they aren’t those damned alt-right furries… *shakes fist*

I do hope so. Sometimes I think that I’d like to run for office, but then I think about the fact that I’ve shared pictures of myself IRL on various furry accounts I have and I wonder how that would affect my campaign, especially given that I live in a more conservative area.

@Podkayne – Well, with a title like “The Mating Habits of Bigfoot And Why Women Want Him”, I wouldn’t be surprised…Sure, it’s supposed to be satire, but we all know how well white supremacists do satire. I’m sure that book will end up being a stalking horse for all sorts of crappy, retrograde ideas about women.

Come to think of it, Bigfoot would make an ideal chaperone. Anyone who can’t see him, well, that’s their problem.

Well, they caught me. Every time I go to drop off a meal during the course of my shift as a highly esteemed food delivery courier, I’m having sex with a Chad approximately every three dropoffs. Sometimes I also friendzone a beta just for shits and grins.

Good article. Reminiscent of Corey Robin’s central thesis of conservatism as a pure reactionary force to the emancipatory movements that arise and especially the ones that are successful.

Regular Mammotheers know I like to go off on local events on occasion (all politics are local, etc.) and Toronto’s politics are nothing short of a clusterfuck right now.

Doug Ford–yes, crack mayor’s brother and current Premier of Ontario–unilaterally slashed the number of council seats in Toronto’s city council from 47 to 25. On the last day for municipal candidates to file their candidacy for office. No consultation, no referendum, just doing it. Legally it probably is in his power to do so given municipalities don’t appear in the constitution, but sensible Premiers tend to avoid this because it’s a recipe for chaos, blatantly ignores the duly elected representatives in the municipality and in general is a dick move. I say “sensible” Premiers don’t do this because this is what Mike Harris did in 1997 with the “megacity” amalgamation, which merged the six boroughs, who each had their own councils and mayor, into a single council with a single mayor.

The rationale behind this move is “saving” $25 million in salaries for councillors and their staffs, and allowing council to be more “efficient” because of the perceived gridlock of having 47 people sound off on every measure. Except those salaries only amount to $9 million. And the workload doesn’t go away.

Needless to say, Mayor John Tory was blindsided, council was furious and I attended my first rally at City Hall Friday night in opposition to this move. Because I can’t sit idly by and let this asshole bully my city in this way. He hated Toronto when he was a councillor and this is nothing more than a vengeance play. The fewer council staffers to vet development proposals is just icing on the cake.

But what’s more chilling is just how ignorant those in favour of this move (read: Ford Nation) are about city governance. Reading the Twitter feeds of Ford supporters like Raymond Cho had the same theme: “Nobody wants more politicians, amirite, hur hur hur….”

I could only sit there and think “Holy shit, these people really do think that all councillors do is sit and vote on stuff… they have no freakin’ clue what the council staff is responsible for….” A simple search of the city website would show it, but they’re so wedded to their contempt for government that they wouldn’t dare venture into a place that informed them.

But what disturbed me even more was the sheer level of hate these people have for Toronto. There was always a joke that Toronto thinks its the center of the universe and it’s the city everyone loves to hate, but that wasn’t a joke, apparently. The suburbs really do loath us, as I found out on the Huffington Post comment sections where several self-identified suburbanites were gleeful that this made Toronto cry. They clearly loath us so much that they’re willing to take a sledgehammer to our very municipal cohesion… for what? To save a buck? There’s a bloated police budget and a $3 billion one-stop subway extension you can take an axe to if it’s money you want to save. This isn’t about savings. It’s about injuring people they hate. Pure and simple.

This is the same dynamic we see all over. It’s “trigger the libs” made manifest, only it’s going to impact my city for years to come!

Mayoral candidate Jennifer Keesmaat, the former city planner, has suggested that Toronto secede from Ontario, as it has more people in it than half the other provinces in the country. I can’t say I’m not unsympathetic to that idea. Now, it’s likely just a headline grabbing statement from her, but it got my attention. And it’s not a suggestion that just came about now; there were murmurings of secession during the megacity merger given Mike Harris’ blatant meddling. I’d like to read Keesmaat’s platform when she releases it.

Frankly, Toronto needs to stand up for itself. This is the second time in as many decades that populist conservative blowhards have sought to kneecap the city for partisan resentment, and that’s what’s really holding the city back: the resentment between the suburbs and the urban core. Doesn’t matter if it’s 25 councillors or 47; if half the councillors simply hate the other half and are against any initiatives that might improve the core, it’ll be the same gridlock that currently has Toronto in its grip. The resentment politics need to end if this city is to get anywhere.

Without a doubt. But the mask slipping off Ford Nation isn’t one of consolidation of power, it’s about injury. That’s why I think vengeance is still the animating factor, even with the power-grab component factored in.

I might be from the colony that fought a war to get rid of our king, but I have to say that women in ponds lobbing swords at people is, at the very least, not on its face an inherently worse form of government than “what can we do to make people suffer?”

Is Facebook trying to help Republicans win the midterms. Like, blatantly?

First they say they can’t get rid of right wing hate speech and conspiracy mongering.

Then Donald Trump makes the claim that the Russians are actually trying to help the Democrats.

Now Facebook is briefing lawmakers on new efforts to manipulate the electorate and the one topic their focusing on is foreign actors creating leftist abolish ICE pages.

I’m not saying they aren’t creating left leaning pages to sow discord too. They did this in 2016 too. But, are we supposed to believe that they’re only doing abolish ICE pages and not white nationalist pages? Really? And why only bring it up after Trump starts putting into a place a strategy to delegitimize the probable blue wave in November?

Thanx for that article. I need that occasionally, cuz sometimes I think post-nixonism is an anomaly and conservatism used to be something other than robber barons….

Today’s Republican Party is nothing more than a gross celebration of inequality. It is loose collective of yahoos and rich assholes and fringe libertarians and pious hypocrites whose only shared trait is their vindictiveness.

@wwth: I think you’re right. IME Facebook just don’t police the (alt) right-wing sites and people nearly as hard.

I’ve seen people get temporarily banned just for using the word “white” to describe someone, or have comments deleted for the same. Conversely, when I reported comments that were direct threats against (left leaning) individuals, advocated sexist attacks and murder of women, or used actual racial slurs, I got the note back from Facebook telling me that they support a large variety of viewpoints and they saw nothing offensive about the comment.

I think it’s safe to say that Facebook is SIGNIFICANTLY alt-right compromised, no matter how they might protest.

When people get their accounts suspended for posting their own breastfeeding pics, but Holocaust denial pages can’t be taken down because that doesn’t count as fake news and freeze peach of Nazis can’t be interfered with, something is not right.

Of course, the “SJW” set has been pointing this incongruity out for years and were ignored. It’s only now that the story is gaining traction.

I think it’s safe to say that Facebook is SIGNIFICANTLY alt-right compromised, no matter how they might protest.

There is a British docu about Facebook which shows exactly this. FB rep denied it of course, but it is shown time and time again that far right groups will be tolerated if they get a lot of traffic, but a woman breastfeeding, well that’s just outrageous!

Horribly it will also leave up videos of child abuse and other violence using the excuse that it is to aid detection (example used: offender was already in prison), or if the caption is ‘condemning’ of what is happening (example used: caption was descriptive, there was no bias positive or negative).

I think that FB’s central sin, and the reason that it is going to continue to tolerate Nazis and otherhorrible authoritarians is… well, it’s the same sin as any other white patriarch. Nazis won’t hurt them. Pedophiles won’t hurt them. Abusers won’t hurt them. They can afford to be distant and abstract about those threats because they aren’t real to a wealthy white dude. They can feel free to have theoretical conversations about the right to free speech versus the threat of creeping authoritarianism, because these fuckers can consider everything an interesting theoretical conversation. They don’t know how to empathize.

S’why I have zero qualms about calling their problem a systemic lack of empathy. They don’t know how to feel empathy for others.

I got barked at for doing paperwork wrong the other day. I try not to let these things bother me, you have to wonder if a guy would have to deal with the same BS. They don’t, studies have shown this.

I even correctly predicted that this (tax guy) was going to find something to lecture me about, he’s just looking for something to argue about, I guess that’s their form of “advice.” Yesterday I got barked at for paying something – a few days early. Seriously.

I think they try this BS on women more than men. It’s blatantly obvious that this guy is just looking to create drama about something.

You SIGNED!? your NAME!? with your middle initial???

IT’S THE APOCALYPSE!!! OH GOD HELP US ALL!!!

I’m not even kidding you.

An interesting tale from our friend T here,

About the various J Peterson crap discussed, and pix of him, I remarked that he kind of vaguely resembles the actor Martin Landau.

Ah, sigh, more sad, T remembered some of her past legal things involving an atty who was a relative of Martin Landau. And he was a “brilliant guy, took care of everything, it all went 1, 2, 3.” And tales about just conversing with the guy, and how interesting he was.

Few months ago, she’s telling me about this guy, I said Wait! Maybe I could get this guy too! For my current issues. Which is why we looked him up and – he has passed away 🙁

Absolutely brilliant guy. – T

And I’m stuck with this slimy fool who reminds of the guy who does the lie detector tests on the Steve Wilkos show.

@Scildfreja Unnyðnes(about the opinion of Facebook beeing safe from Nazis):
Beeing safe because they aren’t the target is a dumb idea, if you have to do with Nazis. Shortly ago a list with 25.000 enemys was found on one hategroup in Germany. I am sure other list exist. (I am sure I did read a post about Day having such a list, could have been on this website) If someone looks at the history in Germany when the Nazis were in power, they did murder a lot of people who though they were safe. So nope you can never be safe from those guys, exspecially when they get to power.

It is allways the question when to ban people on a platform like Facebook or twitter (a ban of the Orange One will probably be very difficult and would possible good for him), but a place without rules will mostly only have the worst people left.

@Katamount:
Back when Rob Ford was in power, I know I was saying that Ford’s attitude was basically Harris’ writ smaller and with fewer attempts to pretty it up: play on hatred of Toronto and focus on punishing Toronto so the people wouldn’t notice how the floor was being cut out from under them as well. Which was an interesting tactic for the Mayor of Toronto.

“The stories we’ve been getting back are people who are eating healthier. They’re able to participate in the community again. People are going back to school. They’re buying winter clothes they couldn’t afford and staying warm. These are very human stories, and they’ve have been shut down by an uncaring and ill conceived political decision.”

Between neo-Nazis who fetishize Bigfoot, and Wahhabi-white types like our volasshole OP here, I don’t wonder that Sasquatches don’t want to associate with us humans. I’m just about ready to join them hiding in the most remote quarter of the woods, myself.

The modern Nazis and fascists, just like the old ones, are careful. They don’t rock the boat too hard, because they don’t want the centrists to have a motivation to do something. So long as the economy keeps ticking over, the grocery stores are still full of food and the gas stations are full of gas, and they can all buy lattes every couple of days and iphones every couple of years, they’ll give the fascists all of the cooperation they want.

As with anything, the fascists won’t move against Facebook, the corporate world, or white middle-class suburbia, because they’re useful.

I know that’s pretty much what you’re saying, you’re just coming at it from another direction – you’re saying that Facebook will not be safe if they don’t toe the line. That’s the thing, really. They’re always gonna toe the line, because that’s the deal they’ve got. Keep your head down and enjoy the benefits of imperialism. Etc, etc.

I think it’s important to make the distinction here, though. Facebook’s chosen their side.

Yeah fuck no. We Germans still think adults having sexual relations with 14 year Olds is skeevy as hell, even if it’s not automatically statutory rape. The age of consent is largely meant to not punish teenagers having sex with other teenagers, and while somebody actually has to make a complaint for an adult to be prosecuted for having sex with a 14 year old, the power difference and difference in maturity, is definitely a reason to prosecute an adult for abusing a minor. Personally by now I don’t think there should be this gray area of the supposedly mature 14 yo that can actually make a consensual decision to have sex with an adult at all(cause that actually being the case will almost never happen, abuse of that argument to sexually exploit teenagers oth… Yep, that surely happens a lot) , but I’m still gonna say that that is NOT THE INTENTION AT ALL of setting the age of consent at 14 at all and that loophole should be closed. Or it is pedophiles winning out on our law here, in which case that’s certainly not something to be proud off and to bash the US over. Just to set that straight.

Donate to the Mammoth!

We Hunted the Mammoth is an ad-free, reader-supported publication written and published by longtime journalist David Futrelle, who has been tracking, dissecting, and mocking the growing misogynistic backlash since 2010, exposing the hateful ideologies of Men’s Rights Activists, incels, alt-rightists and many others.

We depend on support from people like you. Please consider a donation or a monthly pledge by clicking below! there's no need for a PayPal account.

Send comments, questions, and tips for stories to me at dfutrelle@gmail.com, or by clicking here